If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Article on graphics driver - need inputs

12-04-2011, 02:04 AM

Hello guys

I am writing an article on the state of graphics driver on linux. What I aim to do is compare Intel, AMD and Nvdia graphics support in both open source and closed alternatives.
Till now this is how I plan to test . Use Ubuntu and Mandirva / Fedora 16 for the test environment. and test the graphics capabilities in multiple desktop environment.

Hello guys
I am writing an article on the state of graphics driver on linux. What I aim to do is compare Intel, AMD and Nvdia graphics support in both open source and closed alternatives.
Till now this is how I plan to test . Use Ubuntu and Mandirva / Fedora 16 for the test environment. and test the graphics capabilities in multiple desktop environment.
1. check desktop env, compatibility and performance. Gnome3, legacy gnome, unity and kde.
2. glxgears as the benchmarks ?
3. unigine benchmarks for comparing opensource and closed performance diff.
4. 1080p and hardware acceleration.
So what I want is you guys to suggest me some better test if available and please post your experience with performance and specially h.w acceleration in Intel and nvidia.
This is probably the first time I am asking for inputs but I need it to make the article comprehensive. Any inputs and suggestions are welcome.
Please do help me making a decent writeup.
Regards

If you use glxgears as a benchmark it will be complete useless.
because its a function test not a benchmark. please don't do this.

You should use a open-source game engine as a benchmark doom3 for example. quake3 as a benchmark is outdated but maybe for an legacy software example.

In my point of view Unigine is not a good benchmark for opensource drivers. You should use quake3 as an example of antiquated software and doom3 for current software for benchmarking the open-source drivers.

Comment

Ok I'll keep your suggestion in mind but how do I measure fps in linux /

you can write an article without any "FPS" because in the real world FPS only matters if it drops lower than 60/30fps.
you can do an accurate test in only simple answers basic questions.
game runs playable well? yes/no
optical quality is good/bad
is max settings and high resolution is playable possible yes/no.
game do have compatibility issues on driver/hardware yes/no

also its always good to set a price limit for every testet system
for example 400? if on one system the gpu is cheap because its a intel onboard you can put a faster cpu or faster ram into the system.
if a graphic card is expensive you can only put a slow cpu and less ram into the system.
this shows how well every different graphic system run well per 1 euro.
its pointless to compare a 500? graphic card +1000? cpu to an 0?/50? graphic card with the same cpu.
in reality you always have to balance a system one a fix price range.

and i know phoronix/Micheal test always different.

but you should not do the same as Michael.

Michaels way is to complex to hard to understand and there is no guideline and no suggestion.

Comment

it makes a big different if you benchmark with 3dmark2006 or with a real game.
the practical relevance of 3Dmark2006 is zero.
same with unigine benchmarks like "heaven" practical relevance is zero.

if you wanna do a unigine based benchmark use the game "oil-rush" and not the benchmarks.

Oh wow.... This may be your first post that I completely agree with...

EDIT: To the OP. FPS is reasonable to measure if you do it on a line graph, where time is compared against FPS. Take a sample of FPS every 1 second or 5 seconds, and then put it on a line graph. The more samples you take, the more meaningful it will be. Not in benchmark mode, but rather as your playing through the game. This way you can get a visual representation of how well the game actually performs as it is being played through.

The problem with this method is that because youre playing through the game results between cards wont be exactly comparable. They will be real life, but not comparable. The reason it wont be comparable is because each run through, the frames being rendered at each individual sample wont be exactly the same.... Still I would rather have a real life benchmark, than a comparable benchmark.

Comment

EDIT2: The same can also be true of video playback, except this time you'll do time versus cpu usage on a line graph. Except that with video playback the results will be both real life AND comparable, because the frames being rendered at each sample will always be exactly the same.